Terrorism against a particular group that is condoned or encouraged by the Bible and committed by self-identified Christians in the name and honor of their Lord.(This excludes the halocast)This is not meant to be an all inclusive list.

2) European witch trials 1560-1630 Tens of thousands murdered, targeted group mostly women, identified as Satanists, mostly against their objections.The Salem witch trials also occurred during this time, hardly a blip on the terrorist radar.

5) The Army of God - 1982 to present - U.S. Christian group targeting anyone supporting the right to choose abortion."Army of God Manual," a privately printed, closely guarded "how-to" manual for activists, showing how to harass, attack, and even kill abortion providers.http://thinkprogress.org...

~ ~ ~Christian Dominionism - 1970s to present

This is a logical extension of Manifest Destiny and the Army of God movement.The movement cannot be tied to true terrorist acts, but they operate behind the scenes. When did you last see a news story about "Dominionism"?My first exposure to this group was with Rev Dr D James Kennedy, in the 1970s.http://www.patheos.com...Dominionists believe that the civil laws laid down by the Old Testamentt (as distinct from the moral laws such as the Ten Commandments) should be enforced by reforming the U.S. legal system along theocratic lines, which would entail a substantial increase in the use of capital punishment. They also believe that that biblical injunctions regarding slavery should be followed.http://rationalwiki.org...There are current Republican candidates who court the Dominionist vote.

~ ~ ~

Puritan Pequot warThe massacre at Mystic is over in less than an hour. The battle cuts the heart from the Pequot people and scatters them across what is now southern New England, Long Island, and Upstate New York. Over the next few months, remaining resistors are either tracked down and killed or enslaved. The name "Pequot" is outlawed by the English. The Puritan justification for the action is simply stated by Captain Underhill:"It may be demanded, Why should you be so furious? Should not Christians have more mercy and compassion? Sometimes the Scripture declareth women and children must perish with their parents. Sometimes the case alters, but we will not dispute it now. We had sufficient light from the word of God for our proceedings."

For example, the Puritan massacres of the Pequot Indian tribe on May 26, 1637, and again on July 14, 1637, were deemed by the Puritans to be directed by God -- Captain John Mason declared, "God laughed his Enemies and the Enemies of his People to Scorn, making them as a fiery Oven ... Thus did the Lord judge among the Heathen, filling the Place with dead Bodies" (Segal and Stinenback, Puritans, Indians, and Manifest Destiny, pp. 111-112, 134-135).

Not content to take prisoners, the Puritans "exterminate[d] the remnant"; those they were unable to capture themselves, they delegated the killing to civilians, requiring the heads of the targeted Indians as evidence of their deaths.http://www.rapidnet.com...

~ ~ ~Manifest Destiny (1645-present)Many of my Christian friends tell me there is no connection between the Bible and Manifest Destiny. Others will agree.

Short Version - long timelineGod gave Israel dominion over Canaan and other lands in that region, from the time of Adam.The new covenant in Christ conferred this dominion to Christianity under authority of the Pope.The protestant reformation transferred this authority to the protestant Kings.The independence of the Colonies transferred this authority to the government and people of the United States.These things all being ordained by the Bible, gave the U.S. the Divine Right to take all land from Native Americans, and in their generosity they were paid with the gift of civilization and Christianity, as just compensation.If the ingrate heathens are not pleased they can be slaughtered.

Short version - short timelineIn 1845, an unsigned article in a popular American journal, a long standing Jacksonian publication, the Democratic Review, issued an unmistakable call for American expansionism. Focusing mainly on bringing the Republic of Texas into the union, it declared that expansion represented "the fulfillment of our manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions." Thus a powerful American slogan was born. "Manifest Destiny" became first and foremost a call and justification for an American form of imperialism, and neatly summarized the goals of the Mexican War. It claimed that America had a destiny, manifest, i.e., self-evident, from God to occupy the North American continent south of Canada (it also claimed the right to the Oregon territory including the Canadian portion). "Manifest Destiny" was also clearly a racial doctrine of white supremacy that granted no native American or nonwhite claims to any permanent possession of the lands on the North American continent and justified white American expropriation of Indian lands.http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org...~ ~

But before getting into the deeper roots of the Discovery Doctrine, what exactly is it that Johnson v. McIntosh says? The Johnson case is the foundation of all United States law regarding Indians, and what it says is that by virtue of discovery, the Europeans (and by succession, the Americans) have dominion and sovereignty over Native peoples, lands and governments.

The New World, on paper, was legally "vacant" - terra nullius or vacuum domicilium in Latin. Title to all Indian land is thus held by the discoverer, and Indian people are subject to the overriding political sovereignty of the discoverer. How was this justified?

In Chief Justice Marshall"s words:[T]he character and religion of [the New World"s] inhabitants afforded an apology for considering them as a people over whom the superior genius of Europe might claim an ascendancy. To leave them in possession of their country was to leave the country a wilderness ...[A]griculturalists, merchants, and manufacturers, have a right, on abstract principles, to expel hunters from [their] territory ...[E]xcuse, if not justification, [could be found] in the character and habits of the people whose rights ha[d] been wrested from them ...The potentates of the Old World ... made ample compensation to the inhabitants of the new, by bestowing upon them civilization and Christianity.

How is it that in 1823 when Johnson v. McIntosh was written, a time when less than one-quarter to one-third of the United States was settled and hundreds of Indian nations lived free and independent, the Discovery Doctrine was already so firmly entrenched in the western legal tradition that Marshall was merely applying it, not inventing it?The answer is because the land of Canaan was inhabited.

When Abraham began the long march of civilization ever westward, leaving Ur of the Chaldees to go west across the River Jordan to Canaan, he, like Marshall, needed a reason for dispossessing the Canaanites who lived there.The reason, according to the Bible, was that God had given the land to Abraham"s people, the Canaanites notwithstanding. As God said through Joshua, "I gave you a land on which you had not labored, and cities which you had not built, and you dwell therein." (Joshua 24:13)

In the Bible, wars of extermination were sanctioned against local inhabitants who stood in the way of the "chosen people." Speaking of Joshua"s war with the city of Hazor, the Bible tells us: "They smote all the souls that were therein with the edge of the sword utterly destroying them. There was not any left to breathe and he burnt Hazor with fire." (Joshua 11:11)

The Lord"s gift, and the actions taken by the Hebrews to realize it, were justified on the grounds that the indigenous inhabitants were idolaters, cannibals and human sacrificers, neither civilized nor of the true faith. Some ancient Hebrew apologists also advanced terra nullius arguments, claiming that Canaan was uninhabited; that is, that the land of Canaan had no Canaanites. Others claimed that the Canaanites had stolen the land from ancestors of the Hebrews, and thus that the Hebrews were the original occupants.

All of this was by way of legalistic apologetic, for as a matter of faith,according to the Bible, the Jews believed that Canaan was their destiny and, in fact, it was a manifest one. They were the "chosen people," the inheritors of God"s covenant with Abraham, who had himself inherited God"s promise to Adam, made on the first page of the first Book of the Bible, where God said, "Let us make man ... and let them have dominion over the... earth ... Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion ... over every living thing." (Genesis 1:26 - 28)

This promise was renewed to Noah after the Flood, with the further provision that: "[t]he fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth ... upon everything that creeps on the ground ... into your hand they are delivered." (Genesis 9:2) Man was given power over God"screation, and also the right to name God"s creatures: "[O]ut of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air ... and whatever [Adam] called every living creature, that was its name." (Genesis 2:19) Man was thus given the power of the Word, and it is a straight line from Adam"s naming of the animals to Christopher Columbus"mistakenly naming all the indigenous peoples of two continents as "Indians."

The people of Abraham were the "chosen people." The colonizing religions of the Old World - Judaism, Christianity and Islam - all trace back to Abraham, and through him to Noah and to Adam, in order to inherit this "chosen" status and thus to inherit the earth and dominion over it. Judaism and Christianity trace to Isaac, Abraham"s son by his wife Sarah, whereas Islam traces to Ishmael, Abraham"s son by his servant Hagar. As it is written in the Book of Psalms, God said, "Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage, and the ends of the earth your possession." (Psalms 2:1-11)

Jesus Christ brought forth a new Covenant, but it was with the old "chosen people," who needed to accept Christ as the Messiah to remain "chosen." The early Christian writer Justin Martyr made this clear when he was confronted by a Rabbi who asked, "What is this? Are you Israel?" The Martyr answered, "yes." On the basis of Christ"s Covenant, the medieval Popes formalized and legalized the Church"s jurisdiction over the entire world, Christian and heathen alike. They further undertook to grant and take heathen lands notwithstanding their inhabitation. Various Papal Bulls were issued to Catholic sovereigns, the most notorious being the 1493 Inter Cetera Bull dividing the world between Spain and Portugal and sanctioning their actions to "subdue the said mainlands and islands and their natives and inhabitants, with God"s grace and to bring them to the Catholic faith."

The Protestant translation of the Discovery Doctrine was simply that, a translation of the basic doctrine into the language of the Reformation, meaning the repudiation of Papal supremacy. Protestant kings, therefore, ruling by divine right, were in their own minds as free as the Pope to grant and charter new lands, and all Christian nations had a destiny to fulfill God"s covenant and undertake the continuing move westward begun by Abraham.

In 1492, therefore, when the Christian kings of Europe, in Justice Marshall"s words, "conducted some of [their] adventurous sons into this western world," they believed, as a religious matter, that whatever they found belonged to them as the "chosen people." The entire Western Hemisphere was terra nullius - "vacant land." If beings were found there who seemed human, but were not Christian, then they were, in the words of one colonial writer, "little superior, in point of Civilization, to the Beasts of the Field," a formulation neatly tied to the mandate in the Book of Genesis that the sons of Adam shall have dominion over "every beast of the field." (Genesis 2:19)

Being practical men, as they could not realize upon their "extravagant and absurd" claims, as Justice Marshall called them, for fear of military defeat by the Indians, and, in their own way, perhaps even concerned for Native people, the Europeans recognized that Native people had some rights to occupy and use their land. But it was nonetheless clear to the Europeans that Native people did not own their land and thus that the Indians had no power to sell it or otherwise to convey title. The land was owned, and title was held, by the Christian king whose explorers "discovered" it.Read more at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com...

As it is, it was the church who is heretics here not those murdered. The heretics killed opposed church teaching because the church was wrong and stood against scripture. Then there were ones killed who were heretics and that also was wrong. The church does not make Christianity, the scripture does. If the church and the people within it act against scripture then they are not Christians or acting as such. This is just like a morally viewed man commits acts against morality. They were not what they claimed to be.

2) European witch trials 1560-1630 Tens of thousands murdered, targeted group mostly women, identified as Satanists, mostly against their objections.The Salem witch trials also occurred during this time, hardly a blip on the terrorist radar.

Though witches are satanic it is not the place of Christians to kill anyone unless to protect themselves and family and country against physical harm. This again was not Christian behavior.

I agree this was barbaric as I am partly Indian. Again not what Christianity teaches within scripture.

5) The Army of God - 1982 to present - U.S. Christian group targeting anyone supporting the right to choose abortion."Army of God Manual," a privately printed, closely guarded "how-to" manual for activists, showing how to harass, attack, and even kill abortion providers.http://thinkprogress.org...

These people are not of God or Christian. Again the scripture is the manual and is against these acts. Abortion is murder but I am not commanded to kill or harm people because of it. I am ordered to preach the truth of scripture only.

~ ~ ~Christian Dominionism - 1970s to present

This is a logical extension of Manifest Destiny and the Army of God movement.The movement cannot be tied to true terrorist acts, but they operate behind the scenes. When did you last see a news story about "Dominionism"?My first exposure to this group was with Rev Dr D James Kennedy, in the 1970s.

Your first hint is anyone using the term "Reverand" as they are stating they are to be referenced. God only is to be reverenced.

Dominionists believe that the civil laws laid down by the Old Testamentt (as distinct from the moral laws such as the Ten Commandments) should be enforced by reforming the U.S. legal system along theocratic lines, which would entail a substantial increase in the use of capital punishment. They also believe that that biblical injunctions regarding slavery should be followed.

False. Christianity is to be the teaching of Christ and his apostles who clearly taught that Christ fulfilled the Old Law.

Puritan Pequot warThe massacre at Mystic is over in less than an hour. The battle cuts the heart from the Pequot people and scatters them across what is now southern New England, Long Island, and Upstate New York. Over the next few months, remaining resistors are either tracked down and killed or enslaved. The name "Pequot" is outlawed by the English. The Puritan justification for the action is simply stated by Captain Underhill:"It may be demanded, Why should you be so furious? Should not Christians have more mercy and compassion? Sometimes the Scripture declareth women and children must perish with their parents. Sometimes the case alters, but we will not dispute it now. We had sufficient light from the word of God for our proceedings."

For example, the Puritan massacres of the Pequot Indian tribe on May 26, 1637, and again on July 14, 1637, were deemed by the Puritans to be directed by God -- Captain John Mason declared, "God laughed his Enemies and the Enemies of his People to Scorn, making them as a fiery Oven ... Thus did the Lord judge among the Heathen, filling the Place with dead Bodies" (Segal and Stinenback, Puritans, Indians, and Manifest Destiny, pp. 111-112, 134-135).

Not content to take prisoners, the Puritans "exterminate[d] the remnant"; those they were unable to capture themselves, they delegated the killing to civilians, requiring the heads of the targeted Indians as evidence of their deaths.http://www.rapidnet.com...

~ ~ ~Manifest Destiny (1645-present)Many of my Christian friends tell me there is no connection between the Bible and Manifest Destiny. Others will agree.

Short Version - long timelineGod gave Israel dominion over Canaan and other lands in that region, from the time of Adam.The new covenant in Christ conferred this dominion to Christianity under authority of the Pope.The protestant reformation transferred this authority to the protestant Kings.The independence of the Colonies transferred this authority to the government and people of the United States.These things all being ordained by the Bible, gave the U.S. the Divine Right to take all land from Native Americans, and in their generosity they were paid with the gift of civilization and Christianity, as just compensation.If the ingrate heathens are not pleased they can be slaughtered.

Short version - short timelineIn 1845, an unsigned article in a popular American journal, a long standing Jacksonian publication, the Democratic Review, issued an unmistakable call for American expansionism. Focusing mainly on bringing the Republic of Texas into the union, it declared that expansion represented "the fulfillment of our manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions." Thus a powerful American slogan was born. "Manifest Destiny" became first and foremost a call and justification for an American form of imperialism, and neatly summarized the goals of the Mexican War. It claimed that America had a destiny, manifest, i.e., self-evident, from God to occupy the North American continent south of Canada (it also claimed the right to the Oregon territory including the Canadian portion). "Manifest Destiny" was also clearly a racial doctrine of white supremacy that granted no native American or nonwhite claims to any permanent possession of the lands on the North American continent and justified white American expropriation of Indian lands.http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org...~ ~

See next post for the long version of Manifest Destiny.

None of this is taught in scripture. Christianity is what Christ and the apostles taught and any other act or teaching outside of that is false Christianity and someone using the name of Christianity in their own interest.

None of this is taught in scripture. Christianity is what Christ and the apostles taught and any other act or teaching outside of that is false Christianity and someone using the name of Christianity in their own interest.

What is the Biblical basis giving you the authority to determine who is a true Christian, or what the words of scripture mean?Why should we believe you, and not them?

Jesus taught that the OT law still stands. Neither he not the apostles have to repeat all of it, it still stands."Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled" (Matthew 5:17-18).

What is the Biblical basis giving you the authority to determine who is a true Christian, or what the words of scripture mean?

You know a tree by its fruit and a good tree beareth good fruit and a bad tree beareth bad fruit. If you love Christ you would follow Him. To follow Him is to follow His Words which is scripture. The Holy Ghost gives authority but that could be misused indeed by people who have not the Holy Ghost. So the person must decide for themselves if the Christian stands true to the scripture or not.

Why should we believe you, and not them?

Again a Christian holds true to scripture if they do not then they are false. It is as simple as that.

Jesus taught that the OT law still stands. Neither he not the apostles have to repeat all of it, it still stands."Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled" (Matthew 5:17-18).

Did you miss what was said there? Jesus fulfilled the Law! Therefore, the Christian does not need to fulfill the Law because Christ has. The Christian needs only to believe, have faith and follow Christ and His work will save them.

Does what Paul taught supersede what Jesus taught?

Paul taught nothing of himself. He taught what Christ gave him to teach. His teachings are Christ teaching as Paul says as such:

1 Timothy 2:7 "Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity."

Paul taught what I said above:

Romans 16:18 "For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple."

1 Timothy 4:1 "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;"

What is the Biblical basis giving you the authority to determine who is a true Christian, or what the words of scripture mean?

You know a tree by its fruit and a good tree beareth good fruit and a bad tree beareth bad fruit.

And what kind of a tree beareth bad fruit?

If you love Christ you would follow Him.

I don't love Christ, that would be silly.

To follow Him is to follow His Words which is scripture.

One can read the worlds in scripture and glean what's there without having to love one it's main characters. There are lots of books to read that are far better than scriptures.

The Holy Ghost gives authority but that could be misused indeed by people who have not the Holy Ghost.

The Holy Ghost being either the boogeyman or a mental disorder.

So the person must decide for themselves if the Christian stands true to the scripture or not.

There isn't a single person on the planet that stands true to scripture.

Why should we believe you, and not them?

Again a Christian holds true to scripture if they do not then they are false. It is as simple as that.

Then, all Christians are false Christians.

Jesus taught that the OT law still stands. Neither he not the apostles have to repeat all of it, it still stands."Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled" (Matthew 5:17-18).

Did you miss what was said there? Jesus fulfilled the Law! Therefore, the Christian does not need to fulfill the Law because Christ has. The Christian needs only to believe, have faith and follow Christ and His work will save them.

Does what Paul taught supersede what Jesus taught?

Paul taught nothing of himself. He taught what Christ gave him to teach. His teachings are Christ teaching as Paul says as such:

1 Timothy 2:7 "Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity."

Paul taught what I said above:

Romans 16:18 "For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple."

1 Timothy 4:1 "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;"

Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
There would be peace if you obeyed us.~Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth

Though witches are satanic it is not the place of Christians to kill anyone unless to protect themselves and family and country against physical harm.

That is exactly their justification for attacking abortion providers.

They have no justification. They are as evil as the abortionist.

While I would argue that abortionists are not "evil", the killers certainly claim to be justified in their doing, just as they are justified in anti-homosexual propaganda, since their reasoning is precisely that they protect themselvs, their country and their children from supposed corrosive effects of both on 'morality'. (poor morals -> muricas downfall etc.)

This term is specifically for those who believe in Christ. Just because one believes does not mean they are saved. Hence Christ said we can know who is said and who is not by their fruit. A Christian would acts unChrist like are either backsliding or unsaved. Also those who preach against the scripture or refuse it out right are bearing bad fruit. Mainly though bad fruit is those who act contrary to scripture. A tree that bringeth forth bad fruit is a corrupt tree.

Matthew 12:33 "Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit."

If you love Christ you would follow Him.

I don't love Christ, that would be silly.

This statement makes your next one void.

To follow Him is to follow His Words which is scripture.

One can read the worlds in scripture and glean what's there without having to love one it's main characters.

No can read it but cannot produce it without love in Christ. As Christ stated the first law is "to love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and understanding"

There are lots of books to read that are far better than scriptures.

I do not think so and this is entirely a personal opinion.

The Holy Ghost gives authority but that could be misused indeed by people who have not the Holy Ghost.

The Holy Ghost being either the boogeyman or a mental disorder.

Just because you have lack of understanding or abilities to know such things does not by any means make those who do "mental cases"

So the person must decide for themselves if the Christian stands true to the scripture or not.

There isn't a single person on the planet that stands true to scripture.

Indeed there are, few, but there are. Standing to scripture is not the same as perfectly following scripture. I stand true to every single jot and tiddle of scripture in belief but fail to not get angry or do something I should not. It is true everyone has fallen short but not everyone has stopped believing every word of scripture over their own. EX. I sin by what scripture says is sin but I know it is sin and will stand to state it is sin against my own self because scripture says it. That is standing true to scripture. Standing against ones own actions for scriptures declarations.

Why should we believe you, and not them?

Again a Christian holds true to scripture if they do not then they are false. It is as simple as that.

Then, all Christians are false Christians.

Try and not make statements grouping everyone in them as you know not everyone and if they really hold to scripture. 'Holding to' is a belief in scriptures.

Though witches are satanic it is not the place of Christians to kill anyone unless to protect themselves and family and country against physical harm.

That is exactly their justification for attacking abortion providers.

They have no justification. They are as evil as the abortionist.

While I would argue that abortionists are not "evil", the killers certainly claim to be justified in their doing, just as they are justified in anti-homosexual propaganda, since their reasoning is precisely that they protect themselvs, their country and their children from supposed corrosive effects of both on 'morality'. (poor morals -> muricas downfall etc.)

I am sure they believe that but they are false. They fall short of scripture which they claim to follow. Christ and the N.T. never said to go and kill or harm others just because they believe or act contrary to what you do ever. In fact God condoned freedom to do such acts. I can stand against a homosexual for their use of freedom but then stand with them in their right to have freedom. I cannot stand with a abortionist as it is no ones right to murder especially babies. Thought I have no right to kill them. As much Christ orders us to obey the law of the land as much as it does not go against our faith. Abortions is against our faith so we should speak against it but murdering them for aborting babies is also against our faith.

Though witches are satanic it is not the place of Christians to kill anyone unless to protect themselves and family and country against physical harm.

That is exactly their justification for attacking abortion providers.

They have no justification. They are as evil as the abortionist.

While I would argue that abortionists are not "evil", the killers certainly claim to be justified in their doing, just as they are justified in anti-homosexual propaganda, since their reasoning is precisely that they protect themselvs, their country and their children from supposed corrosive effects of both on 'morality'. (poor morals -> muricas downfall etc.)

I am sure they believe that but they are false. They fall short of scripture which they claim to follow. Christ and the N.T. never said to go and kill or harm others just because they believe or act contrary to what you do ever. In fact God condoned freedom to do such acts. I can stand against a homosexual for their use of freedom but then stand with them in their right to have freedom. I cannot stand with a abortionist as it is no ones right to murder especially babies. Thought I have no right to kill them. As much Christ orders us to obey the law of the land as much as it does not go against our faith. Abortions is against our faith so we should speak against it but murdering them for aborting babies is also against our faith.

I am sure they believe that but they are false. They fall short of scripture which they claim to follow. Christ and the N.T. never said to go and kill or harm others just because they believe or act contrary to what you do ever. In fact God condoned freedom to do such acts. I can stand against a homosexual for their use of freedom but then stand with them in their right to have freedom. I cannot stand with a abortionist as it is no ones right to murder especially babies. Thought I have no right to kill them. As much Christ orders us to obey the law of the land as much as it does not go against our faith. Abortions is against our faith so we should speak against it but murdering them for aborting babies is also against our faith.

Of course they are wrong, but so are you.

Since we agree they are wrong then no need for you or me to prove why. Though you stated I am wrong and that requires you to show where and how I am. I am waiting for such a showing.

I am sure they believe that but they are false. They fall short of scripture which they claim to follow. Christ and the N.T. never said to go and kill or harm others just because they believe or act contrary to what you do ever. In fact God condoned freedom to do such acts. I can stand against a homosexual for their use of freedom but then stand with them in their right to have freedom. I cannot stand with a abortionist as it is no ones right to murder especially babies. Thought I have no right to kill them. As much Christ orders us to obey the law of the land as much as it does not go against our faith. Abortions is against our faith so we should speak against it but murdering them for aborting babies is also against our faith.

Of course they are wrong, but so are you.

Since we agree they are wrong then no need for you or me to prove why. Though you stated I am wrong and that requires you to show where and how I am. I am waiting for such a showing.

Theistic morality does not even get of the ground before it started. More on that tomorrow if you wish.

I am sure they believe that but they are false. They fall short of scripture which they claim to follow. Christ and the N.T. never said to go and kill or harm others just because they believe or act contrary to what you do ever. In fact God condoned freedom to do such acts. I can stand against a homosexual for their use of freedom but then stand with them in their right to have freedom. I cannot stand with a abortionist as it is no ones right to murder especially babies. Thought I have no right to kill them. As much Christ orders us to obey the law of the land as much as it does not go against our faith. Abortions is against our faith so we should speak against it but murdering them for aborting babies is also against our faith.

Of course they are wrong, but so are you.

Since we agree they are wrong then no need for you or me to prove why. Though you stated I am wrong and that requires you to show where and how I am. I am waiting for such a showing.

You are wrong because you blame the person, and ignore the text.If civil law allows racism, and lynching, why blame the people - they are only doing what the law allows.Biblical text condones, permits, encourages, the acts they do.They read the text, take it to heart, and live it out.A reasonable person has to say - 'Well, yeah that is what it says, but surely god does not want us to do that.'The problems starts with the text.For well over a millennium, in many cultures, the same problems keep resurfacing, all stemming from the text.The Bible treats homosexuality like eating shellfish - an abomination to god.Somehow everything gets lost in the translation.The problem is in the text, as demonstrated by centuries of the same issues.

This is no a case of one group of people misreading text, it is generation after generation.New Pentecostal Christians in Africa are murdering children as witches. I forgot to add that, maybe tomorrow.

Pastor Celestine Effiong's congregants are being delivered from what they firmly believe to be witchcraft. And in the darkness of the city and the villages beyond, similar shouts and screams echo from makeshift church to makeshift church.

"I have been delivered from witches and wizards today!" exclaimed one exhausted-looking woman.

Pastors in southeast Nigeria claim illness and poverty are caused by witches who bring terrible misfortune to those around them. And those denounced as witches must be cleansed through deliverance or cast out.

Video: Role of church in branding kids

RELATED TOPICSNigeriaChild AbuseReligion

"A child witch is said to be a witch when that child possessed with certain spiritual spells capable of making that child transform into cat, snake, vipers, insects, any other animal and that child is capable of wreaking havoc like killing of people, bringing diseases, misfortune into the family," Sam said.

"When a child is accused of being a witch -- that child is hated absolutely by everybody surrounding him so such children are sent out of the home... But unfortunately such children do not always live long. A lot of them, they're either killed, abandoned by the parents, tortured in the church or trafficked out of the city."~ ~"My parents sent me out of the house -- said I'm a witch," said Samuel, a 15-year-old who has lived on the streets for five years after a local pastor blamed him for unexpected deaths in the family.

"I was beaten by the prophet in the church," he said in a quiet voice.~ ~"Religious leaders capitalize on the ignorance of some parents in the villages just to make some money off them," said Lucky Inyang, project coordinator for 'Stepping Stones Nigeria'.

"They can say your child is a witch and if you bring the child to the church we can deliver the child but eventually they don't deliver the children... The parents go back to the pastor and say, 'why is it you have not been able to deliver the child' and the pastor says 'Oh - this one has gone past deliverance - they've eaten too much flesh so you have to throw the child out.'"

I am blaming the person and am pointing to the text for why they are to blame as the text never claims for them to do what they do.

Biblical text condones, permits, encourages, the acts they do.

You must give a certain act and then find where the New Testament condones it before such a claim.

They read the text, take it to heart, and live it out.

I wish they really did. Thing is the text says no such thing I presume "IDK what act your referring".

A reasonable person has to say - 'Well, yeah that is what it says, but surely god does not want us to do that.'

What act are you referring? Blanket statements are useless.

The problems starts with the text.

That is what I here yet we have no idea what act you are claiming and then you must find it in the text.

For well over a millennium, in many cultures, the same problems keep resurfacing, all stemming from the text.The Bible treats homosexuality like eating shellfish - an abomination to god.

It is a abomination to God and the text says as such. What the text does not say is hate them, persecute them, deny them civil liberty and etc...

Somehow everything gets lost in the translation.

Often is the case when a new version comes out every year when the original is perfectly fine.

The problem is in the text, as demonstrated by centuries of the same issues.

Demonstrated? I have no seen any demonstration yet. Pick a act and then find it in the New Testament. K?

This is no a case of one group of people misreading text, it is generation after generation.New Pentecostal Christians in Africa are murdering children as witches. I forgot to add that, maybe tomorrow.

Maybe tomorrow? You and the other guy used the same language. Kind of suggest same person. So where does the New Testament say burn witches? Hurt them? Do anything to them other than preach the gospel to them? It doesn't.

When 15-year-old Kristy Bamu left his parents in Paris on 16 December 2010, he was looking forward to spending the Christmas holidays with his siblings, visiting their sister and her boyfriend in London.

On Christmas Day he was found by paramedics in the bathroom of an east London high-rise flat. His body had been mutilated, teeth were missing and he was covered in deep cuts and bruising. In the last four days of his life he had suffered acts of unspeakable savagery, doled out by a man he called "uncle" and one of his own sisters.

Why? Because Eric Bikubi, a powerfully built football coach, and Magalie Bamu were convinced the boy was a witch, possessed by spirits who wanted to bring evil into their home. On Thursday they were convicted of murder. They had earlier admitted actual bodily harm against Kristy's sister Kelly and a younger sister, who cannot be named.

"We were concerned about this before this trial of Kristy Bamu," said Debbie Ariyo, executive director of Africans Unite Against Child Abuse (Afruca), who added that a boom in pentecostal churches was leading to more children being accused of witchcraft. "This is not a problem with all pastors or all churches, but the branding of children as witches is not abating. It is a growing problem. There are so many children suffering in silence."

An average of eight children a year in Greater London are victims of abuse based on witchcraft-style exorcisms, but this only reflects cases resulting in police investigations.

Sharpe detailed the horrific abuse, including being beaten or forced to drink unknown liquids, starved or deprived of sleep, blindfolded and having their hair shaved off.

Kristy Bamu was subjected to many methods of torture. It began with a simple accident when Kristy, waking in an unfamiliar bed, wet himself. Bikubi, finding the underwear, accused the boy of being possessed by kindoki " the word for witchcraft in the Congolese Lingala language. This is a recognisable trigger in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), where both Bikubi and Bamu were born, according to Dr Richard Hoskins, an expert in African religions.http://www.theguardian.com...

I am blaming the person and am pointing to the text for why they are to blame as the text never claims for them to do what they do.

Biblical text condones, permits, encourages, the acts they do.

You must give a certain act and then find where the New Testament condones it before such a claim.

They read the text, take it to heart, and live it out.

I wish they really did. Thing is the text says no such thing I presume "IDK what act your referring".

A reasonable person has to say - 'Well, yeah that is what it says, but surely god does not want us to do that.'

What act are you referring? Blanket statements are useless.

The problems starts with the text.

That is what I here yet we have no idea what act you are claiming and then you must find it in the text.

For well over a millennium, in many cultures, the same problems keep resurfacing, all stemming from the text.The Bible treats homosexuality like eating shellfish - an abomination to god.

It is a abomination to God and the text says as such. What the text does not say is hate them, persecute them, deny them civil liberty and etc...

Somehow everything gets lost in the translation.

Often is the case when a new version comes out every year when the original is perfectly fine.

The problem is in the text, as demonstrated by centuries of the same issues.

Demonstrated? I have no seen any demonstration yet. Pick a act and then find it in the New Testament. K?

This is no a case of one group of people misreading text, it is generation after generation.New Pentecostal Christians in Africa are murdering children as witches. I forgot to add that, maybe tomorrow.

Maybe tomorrow? You and the other guy used the same language. Kind of suggest same person. So where does the New Testament say burn witches? Hurt them? Do anything to them other than preach the gospel to them? It doesn't.

Tens of thousands of witches murdered in Europe by Bible believing Christians.You think they just made this up? It still goes onDid you read my references on Manifest Destiny?It is all laid out. Biblical justification for the slaughter of Native Americans.The Bible is a lot more than the NT.I have attended Anabaptist churches and there are ten OT based sermons preached for every one from the NT.The OT is alive and well in all Christian churches.Surely you are not that ignorant.

Tens of thousands of witches murdered in Europe by Bible believing Christians.

They are not Christians. IDK what they are. Christianity is what Christ taught by either Himself or his apostles. Where do any of them say do this?

You think they just made this up? It still goes onDid you read my references on Manifest Destiny?

Again IDC about some cult group claiming to be Christian. Christianity is what Christ taught and His apostles taught. Did they teach this?

It is all laid out. Biblical justification for the slaughter of Native Americans.

Their is no justification for slaughtering anyone in the NT.

The Bible is a lot more than the NT.

Indeed it is but Christians follow Christ and not the old law. Want Biblical proof?

Romans 7:6 "But now we are delivered from the law (OT Law you refer), that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit(the new Testament by Christ), and not in the oldness of the letter."

I have attended Anabaptist churches and there are ten OT based sermons preached for every one from the NT.

Of course we still preach from the OT for examples and to show Christ in the OT but not to practice the old law.

The OT is alive and well in all Christian churches.

As it should. The Old Testament in whole was for four things, 1) to prophecy of Christ, 2) To show all men Jew and Gentile they are sinners and incapable of doing good to gain forgiveness and 3) to make man realize they need a savior. The 4th) os for historical value.

Surely you are not that ignorant.

Surely your not ignorant enough to think Christians should act and believe against what Christ and His apostles taught?

These examples of "Christian terrorism" are not about people who follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. These are about people who follow Paul's teachings and Pauline "Christianity" which ignores Jesus's teachings and only uses Jesus as a Cosmic Get Out of Hell magic card, Jesus' teachings are of no real concern to Paulists who quote Paul ten times over Jesus whenever asked to quote the New Testament. Paul introduced total hypocrisy into Christianity by his obsession to make Christians acceptable to Roman Empire governors. He did this with two or three insertions in his Letters to the effect ordering, commanding Christians to obey their established governors or face God's condemnation to Hell. And that did the trick of turning Christians from Jesus' teachings of non-violence and anti-war into Christians supporting any stupid bloody war that any putz of a king or queen or President ordered. That's why we have a bloody mess of Christians in action because they are all bamboozled with Paul's teachings and not following Christ's.

We Gnostic Christians know about Pauline Christian murderous intent firsthand as we were the very first victims of "Christian" persecution. But the world only knows about Pauline Christrianity as Rome successfully stopped Gnostic Christianity from spreading for almost a thousand years. So there really hasn't been Christian warfare but Paulist warfare and terrorism. Christ didn't teach terrorism like Moses or Muhammad. He taught brotherly love.

At 4/19/2015 8:22:17 PM, celestialtorahteacher wrote:These examples of "Christian terrorism" are not about people who follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. These are about people who follow Paul's teachings and Pauline "Christianity" which ignores Jesus's teachings and only uses Jesus as a Cosmic Get Out of Hell magic card, Jesus' teachings are of no real concern to Paulists who quote Paul ten times over Jesus whenever asked to quote the New Testament. Paul introduced total hypocrisy into Christianity by his obsession to make Christians acceptable to Roman Empire governors. He did this with two or three insertions in his Letters to the effect ordering, commanding Christians to obey their established governors or face God's condemnation to Hell. And that did the trick of turning Christians from Jesus' teachings of non-violence and anti-war into Christians supporting any stupid bloody war that any putz of a king or queen or President ordered. That's why we have a bloody mess of Christians in action because they are all bamboozled with Paul's teachings and not following Christ's.

We Gnostic Christians know about Pauline Christian murderous intent firsthand as we were the very first victims of "Christian" persecution. But the world only knows about Pauline Christrianity as Rome successfully stopped Gnostic Christianity from spreading for almost a thousand years. So there really hasn't been Christian warfare but Paulist warfare and terrorism. Christ didn't teach terrorism like Moses or Muhammad. He taught brotherly love.

I would like you to quote Paul ordering such a teaching. Then I like to overcome the other apostles whom stated Paul a apostle and brother in Christ. Gibberish. Gnosticism is heretical and exactly what was condemned by Christ and all the apostles. Tell us just how Paul confirmed to Rome?

WW, I was hoping to agree with you for a change, but darned if I can identify your position on it.

In any case, I agree with the basic proposition that many Christians and Jews have felt (and some still feel) that they have the moral authority to dominate land and demand theological submission of its inhabitants, and that the precedents for this authority can be traced to the Old Testament.

Tens of thousands of witches murdered in Europe by Bible believing Christians.

They are not Christians. IDK what they are. Christianity is what Christ taught by either Himself or his apostles. Where do any of them say do this?

So you have decided that Catholics, Puritans, Pentecostals, and many more denominations, are not Christian. Not just a few stray members of these denominations, but whole congregations.I expected the 'no true Scotsman' defense, and that is why I said self-identified Christians. I will add that they are not only self identified, but the local and global community did and does consider them to be "Christian".

You think they just made this up? It still goes onDid you read my references on Manifest Destiny?

Again IDC about some cult group claiming to be Christian. Christianity is what Christ taught and His apostles taught. Did they teach this?

Do you even understand the meaning of 'cult'?These churches do not fit the meaning of cult, unless you can show us how.These generalities of you....

It is all laid out. Biblical justification for the slaughter of Native Americans.

Their is no justification for slaughtering anyone in the NT.

The Bible is a lot more than the NT.

Indeed it is but Christians follow Christ and not the old law. Want Biblical proof?

Romans 7:6 "But now we are delivered from the law (OT Law you refer), that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit(the new Testament by Christ), and not in the oldness of the letter."

I ask you to address my lifted explanation of Manifest Destiny.After we cover that we can cover all other issues. One at a time.

I have attended Anabaptist churches and there are ten OT based sermons preached for every one from the NT.

Of course we still preach from the OT for examples and to show Christ in the OT but not to practice the old law.

Well, maybe you belong to a cult.When I read about such things as homosexuality, it is OT references I see.

The OT is alive and well in all Christian churches.

As it should. The Old Testament in whole was for four things, 1) to prophecy of Christ, 2) To show all men Jew and Gentile they are sinners and incapable of doing good to gain forgiveness and 3) to make man realize they need a savior. The 4th) os for historical value.

What?I see a problem with your 'OT is to show Christ in the OT', and this comment.Where do the laws come from, and do they still describe man as sinful, or not.

Surely you are not that ignorant.

Surely your not ignorant enough to think Christians should act and believe against what Christ and His apostles taught?

I am not prescribing, I and describing.What they ought to do, and what they do, are two different things.That is the point.They read the Bible, and say we need to do these things. The Bible gives us authority to take the land from native Aboriginals (of any land), and slaughter them if they resist.Do I think Jesus would approve?From my readings Jesus never once gave a copy of the Torah to any person - ever.The Biblical record shows Jesus only wrote words one time, and that was in sand, and he immediately erased them, we do not know what they said.So that tells me something about the importance of the written word to Jesus. One of the greatest moral teachers of all time (there were others) never wrote a word for his followers to heed. Never a word.He never once said 'Take notes, this is important.' and among his disciples were learned men, they knew how to read and write.I find that significant.

At 4/19/2015 8:22:17 PM, celestialtorahteacher wrote:These examples of "Christian terrorism" are not about people who follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. These are about people who follow Paul's teachings and Pauline "Christianity" which ignores Jesus's teachings and only uses Jesus as a Cosmic Get Out of Hell magic card, Jesus' teachings are of no real concern to Paulists who quote Paul ten times over Jesus whenever asked to quote the New Testament. Paul introduced total hypocrisy into Christianity by his obsession to make Christians acceptable to Roman Empire governors. He did this with two or three insertions in his Letters to the effect ordering, commanding Christians to obey their established governors or face God's condemnation to Hell. And that did the trick of turning Christians from Jesus' teachings of non-violence and anti-war into Christians supporting any stupid bloody war that any putz of a king or queen or President ordered. That's why we have a bloody mess of Christians in action because they are all bamboozled with Paul's teachings and not following Christ's.

We Gnostic Christians know about Pauline Christian murderous intent firsthand as we were the very first victims of "Christian" persecution. But the world only knows about Pauline Christrianity as Rome successfully stopped Gnostic Christianity from spreading for almost a thousand years. So there really hasn't been Christian warfare but Paulist warfare and terrorism. Christ didn't teach terrorism like Moses or Muhammad. He taught brotherly love.

I would like you to quote Paul ordering such a teaching. Then I like to overcome the other apostles whom stated Paul a apostle and brother in Christ. Gibberish. Gnosticism is heretical and exactly what was condemned by Christ and all the apostles. Tell us just how Paul confirmed to Rome?

Romans 13:1-2 "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God;; the powers that be (Roman Empire) are ordained by God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God;; and they that resist shale receive to themselves damnation."--KJV

"Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves."--NKJV

This commandment of Paul goes directly against Jesus's teachings and example where he gave his very life to resist established governing authorities as he refused to obey their man-made laws. So, I hold Paul and Pauline Christianity and Pauline Christians responsible for all the horrors done to innocents, millions and millions of them, due to Pauline Christian obeying killer apes ruling them as "established authorities".

You should also be aware that Paul's whole ideology of reattaching Christianity back to Judaism as a "branch" of Judaism is also not of God as you will find out when you finally do your Christian homework and read about the Hebrews who wrote the Bible you and Paul and all Pauline Christians hold to be the Word of God. It's not. It's the Word of Men faking authority from God. Read about Israeli archeologists debunking all the Torah/Tanakh tall tales as Jewish myths of origin that never occurred in historical reality. None of the major events ever occurred, e.g Moses and the Exodus, David and Solomon's fabulously wealthy Greater Israel, all of it Hebrew tall tales and yet you and Paul and Pauline Christians take these tall tales as literally true. I can't help you when you can't discern truth from religious propaganda, e.g. Paul's attack on us Gnostic Christians as rivals for Christian theological truth. Now you are stuck with Paul in believing in essentially fairy tales as foundation for your Christian faith. Not me, not us Gnostics who never did swallow Bible myths like Pauline Christians were taught to do by Paul.

Next time, try direct spiritual relationship with God and the Spirit of Christ without going through human intercessors with their own political agendas overlaid on eternal spiritual truth to make it disappear from view of believers.

At 4/19/2015 8:22:17 PM, celestialtorahteacher wrote:These examples of "Christian terrorism" are not about people who follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. These are about people who follow Paul's teachings and Pauline "Christianity" which ignores Jesus's teachings and only uses Jesus as a Cosmic Get Out of Hell magic card, Jesus' teachings are of no real concern to Paulists who quote Paul ten times over Jesus whenever asked to quote the New Testament. Paul introduced total hypocrisy into Christianity by his obsession to make Christians acceptable to Roman Empire governors. He did this with two or three insertions in his Letters to the effect ordering, commanding Christians to obey their established governors or face God's condemnation to Hell. And that did the trick of turning Christians from Jesus' teachings of non-violence and anti-war into Christians supporting any stupid bloody war that any putz of a king or queen or President ordered. That's why we have a bloody mess of Christians in action because they are all bamboozled with Paul's teachings and not following Christ's.

We Gnostic Christians know about Pauline Christian murderous intent firsthand as we were the very first victims of "Christian" persecution. But the world only knows about Pauline Christrianity as Rome successfully stopped Gnostic Christianity from spreading for almost a thousand years. So there really hasn't been Christian warfare but Paulist warfare and terrorism. Christ didn't teach terrorism like Moses or Muhammad. He taught brotherly love.

I would like you to quote Paul ordering such a teaching. Then I like to overcome the other apostles whom stated Paul a apostle and brother in Christ. Gibberish. Gnosticism is heretical and exactly what was condemned by Christ and all the apostles. Tell us just how Paul confirmed to Rome?

Romans 13:1-2 "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God;; the powers that be (Roman Empire) are ordained by God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God;; and they that resist shale receive to themselves damnation."--KJV

"Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves."--NKJV

This commandment of Paul goes directly against Jesus's teachings and example where he gave his very life to resist established governing authorities as he refused to obey their man-made laws. So, I hold Paul and Pauline Christianity and Pauline Christians responsible for all the horrors done to innocents, millions and millions of them, due to Pauline Christian obeying killer apes ruling them as "established authorities".

You should also be aware that Paul's whole ideology of reattaching Christianity back to Judaism as a "branch" of Judaism is also not of God as you will find out when you finally do your Christian homework and read about the Hebrews who wrote the Bible you and Paul and all Pauline Christians hold to be the Word of God. It's not. It's the Word of Men faking authority from God. Read about Israeli archeologists debunking all the Torah/Tanakh tall tales as Jewish myths of origin that never occurred in historical reality. None of the major events ever occurred, e.g Moses and the Exodus, David and Solomon's fabulously wealthy Greater Israel, all of it Hebrew tall tales and yet you and Paul and Pauline Christians take these tall tales as literally true. I can't help you when you can't discern truth from religious propaganda, e.g. Paul's attack on us Gnostic Christians as rivals for Christian theological truth. Now you are stuck with Paul in believing in essentially fairy tales as foundation for your Christian faith. Not me, not us Gnostics who never did swallow Bible myths like Pauline Christians were taught to do by Paul.

Next time, try direct spiritual relationship with God and the Spirit of Christ without going through human intercessors with their own political agendas overlaid on eternal spiritual truth to make it disappear from view of believers.

You don't need to follow the Bible's moral teachings to be saved. You just have to believe in God and confess your sins. Can't you justify anything with that mentality? If you already believe that you're a sinner, then you're good to go and you will live forever if you've already confessed.

And that's not even mentioning the violent parts in the Bible, such as the prescribed action to be taken against Malachites.

Terrorism against a particular group that is condoned or encouraged by the Bible and committed by self-identified Christians in the name and honor of their Lord.(This excludes the halocast)This is not meant to be an all inclusive list.

2) European witch trials 1560-1630 Tens of thousands murdered, targeted group mostly women, identified as Satanists, mostly against their objections.The Salem witch trials also occurred during this time, hardly a blip on the terrorist radar.

5) The Army of God - 1982 to present - U.S. Christian group targeting anyone supporting the right to choose abortion."Army of God Manual," a privately printed, closely guarded "how-to" manual for activists, showing how to harass, attack, and even kill abortion providers.http://thinkprogress.org...

~ ~ ~Christian Dominionism - 1970s to present

This is a logical extension of Manifest Destiny and the Army of God movement.The movement cannot be tied to true terrorist acts, but they operate behind the scenes. When did you last see a news story about "Dominionism"?My first exposure to this group was with Rev Dr D James Kennedy, in the 1970s.http://www.patheos.com...Dominionists believe that the civil laws laid down by the Old Testamentt (as distinct from the moral laws such as the Ten Commandments) should be enforced by reforming the U.S. legal system along theocratic lines, which would entail a substantial increase in the use of capital punishment. They also believe that that biblical injunctions regarding slavery should be followed.http://rationalwiki.org...There are current Republican candidates who court the Dominionist vote.

~ ~ ~

Puritan Pequot warThe massacre at Mystic is over in less than an hour. The battle cuts the heart from the Pequot people and scatters them across what is now southern New England, Long Island, and Upstate New York. Over the next few months, remaining resistors are either tracked down and killed or enslaved. The name "Pequot" is outlawed by the English. The Puritan justification for the action is simply stated by Captain Underhill:"It may be demanded, Why should you be so furious? Should not Christians have more mercy and compassion? Sometimes the Scripture declareth women and children must perish with their parents. Sometimes the case alters, but we will not dispute it now. We had sufficient light from the word of God for our proceedings."

For example, the Puritan massacres of the Pequot Indian tribe on May 26, 1637, and again on July 14, 1637, were deemed by the Puritans to be directed by God -- Captain John Mason declared, "God laughed his Enemies and the Enemies of his People to Scorn, making them as a fiery Oven ... Thus did the Lord judge among the Heathen, filling the Place with dead Bodies" (Segal and Stinenback, Puritans, Indians, and Manifest Destiny, pp. 111-112, 134-135).

Not content to take prisoners, the Puritans "exterminate[d] the remnant"; those they were unable to capture themselves, they delegated the killing to civilians, requiring the heads of the targeted Indians as evidence of their deaths.http://www.rapidnet.com...

~ ~ ~Manifest Destiny (1645-present)Many of my Christian friends tell me there is no connection between the Bible and Manifest Destiny. Others will agree.

Short Version - long timelineGod gave Israel dominion over Canaan and other lands in that region, from the time of Adam.The new covenant in Christ conferred this dominion to Christianity under authority of the Pope.The protestant reformation transferred this authority to the protestant Kings.The independence of the Colonies transferred this authority to the government and people of the United States.These things all being ordained by the Bible, gave the U.S. the Divine Right to take all land from Native Americans, and in their generosity they were paid with the gift of civilization and Christianity, as just compensation.If the ingrate heathens are not pleased they can be slaughtered.

Short version - short timelineIn 1845, an unsigned article in a popular American journal, a long standing Jacksonian publication, the Democratic Review, issued an unmistakable call for American expansionism. Focusing mainly on bringing the Republic of Texas into the union, it declared that expansion represented "the fulfillment of our manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions." Thus a powerful American slogan was born. "Manifest Destiny" became first and foremost a call and justification for an American form of imperialism, and neatly summarized the goals of the Mexican War. It claimed that America had a destiny, manifest, i.e., self-evident, from God to occupy the North American continent south of Canada (it also claimed the right to the Oregon territory including the Canadian portion). "Manifest Destiny" was also clearly a racial doctrine of white supremacy that granted no native American or nonwhite claims to any permanent possession of the lands on the North American continent and justified white American expropriation of Indian lands.http://nationalhumanitiescenter.org...~ ~

See next post for the long version of Manifest Destiny.

The term "Christian terrorism is a contradiction, because nowhere in scripture is any form of terrorism authorised or condoned.

How can a terrorist be said to be loving his enemy as Christ said we must?

For more details, ask a Jehovah's Witness about what Jehovah's Kingdom means to them.

Terrorism against a particular group that is condoned or encouraged by the Bible and committed by self-identified Christians in the name and honor of their Lord.(This excludes the halocast)This is not meant to be an all inclusive list.

The term "Christian terrorism is a contradiction, because nowhere in scripture is any form of terrorism authorised or condoned.

How can a terrorist be said to be loving his enemy as Christ said we must?

From my previous post:In the Bible, wars of extermination were sanctioned against local inhabitants who stood in the way of the "chosen people." Speaking of Joshua"s war with the city of Hazor, the Bible tells us: "They smote all the souls that were therein with the edge of the sword utterly destroying them. There was not any left to breathe and he burnt Hazor with fire." (Joshua 11:11)

Jesus was a Jew.He read, understood, and honored the OT.He never once implied that the OT was not to be believed, that it had false accounts of god's chosen people, or false instruction in how they should deal with enemies.Based on these truths, we have examples of Christian Terrorism as I outlined above.

You and I may agree that if we throw away the OT, and say it has no value, only the NT will be instruction from god, then terrorism against all people, regardless of sexual preference, reproduction choices, religious beliefs, color of skin, ethnic background, becomes impossible.Is your list the same as my own?

This is all a moot point.The OT is there, staring us in the face, as the book of instruction the Savior of the Christian religion (and mankind, if you will) used for daily devotion, and instruction in how to live a godly life.He read it, followed it's word, and so do Christians.You and I might agree he had more insight into its meaning, but, it is what it is.

You give children matches and starter fluid, and they may do more than just get the barbie going.

Terrorism against a particular group that is condoned or encouraged by the Bible and committed by self-identified Christians in the name and honor of their Lord.(This excludes the halocast)This is not meant to be an all inclusive list.

The term "Christian terrorism is a contradiction, because nowhere in scripture is any form of terrorism authorised or condoned.

How can a terrorist be said to be loving his enemy as Christ said we must?

From my previous post:In the Bible, wars of extermination were sanctioned against local inhabitants who stood in the way of the "chosen people." Speaking of Joshua"s war with the city of Hazor, the Bible tells us: "They smote all the souls that were therein with the edge of the sword utterly destroying them. There was not any left to breathe and he burnt Hazor with fire." (Joshua 11:11)

Jesus was a Jew.He read, understood, and honored the OT.He never once implied that the OT was not to be believed, that it had false accounts of god's chosen people, or false instruction in how they should deal with enemies.Based on these truths, we have examples of Christian Terrorism as I outlined above.

You and I may agree that if we throw away the OT, and say it has no value, only the NT will be instruction from god, then terrorism against all people, regardless of sexual preference, reproduction choices, religious beliefs, color of skin, ethnic background, becomes impossible.Is your list the same as my own?

This is all a moot point.The OT is there, staring us in the face, as the book of instruction the Savior of the Christian religion (and mankind, if you will) used for daily devotion, and instruction in how to live a godly life.He read it, followed it's word, and so do Christians.You and I might agree he had more insight into its meaning, but, it is what it is.

You give children matches and starter fluid, and they may do more than just get the barbie going.

No, I would never disregard the Hebrew Scriptures, after all that is the source of all the teachings of Christ and the Apostles including Revelation 22:11 which banned any forced interference with the beliefs of others, and Jesus command

As well as Matthew 5:44 which orders us to love our enemy.

Further more Ephesians 6:12 makes it absolutely clear that followers of Christ have no fight with humans.

ASV(i) 12 For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world-rulers of this darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.

Thus the above completely preclude any authorisation for so-called "Christian Terrorism" or in fact "holy wars".

Just because Jehovah destroyed people in defence of his people and to protect the lineage of the Messiah, does not mean that we can take it on ourselves to fight any humans since the Messiah's line no longer need protecting.

Christians must now be at peace with all men.

For more details, ask a Jehovah's Witness about what Jehovah's Kingdom means to them.